Posted on 08/26/2011 10:10:01 PM PDT by mnehring
Ron Paul, House representative of the 14th district of Texas, believes that US foreign policy must be reformed to avoid conflicts around the world.
The interview was conducted outside the Foreign Relations Committee.
Press TV: What is your opinion on the idea of the US blocking Iran's oil exports and preventing its gasoline imports from reaching the country (based on H. Con. Res. 362 previously sought by US congressmen)?
Paul: I think it is an outrage I think it is a blockade. It is the use of force to stop the inflow of petroleum products and people and goods, banking, trains, cars, trucks, cargos. It's all prohibited. How can we stop that without the use of the navy and without the use of force? This idea is not a blockade it is just pure silliness on their part [US senators and congressmen].
If we bomb them, that's the start of hostilities. They (US policy makers) are never willing to take anything off the table, which includes a nuclear-first strike. So, if they do that do you think the Iranians are going to sit still? They are going to react!
The opposition said that, well, we don't want them to block the Strait of Hormuz [the Persian Gulf waterway which allows the passages of a third of the world's daily oil supply]. They ought to change their policy because they are more likely to get the Strait of Hormuz blocked if we persist on this. If we do any bombing or we put on a blockade, it's going to lead to big trouble.
Press TV: There has been a lot of speculation that Israel may act on its own and conduct an independent air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Do you think that's possible?
Paul: I don't think there is such a thing as an independent Israel doing anything, because I think no matter what they do its our money, its our weapons, and their not going to do it without us approving it and if they get into trouble we're going to bail them out, so there is no separation between the two.
Press TV: During your line of questioning at the Foreign Relations Committee you mentioned the Seymour Hersh article, which was among the articles that revealed that the Congress had awarded the Bush administration hundreds of millions of dollars for a covert operation to overthrow the Iranian government. Why did you mention those stories?
Paul: Well it's something that I have known about and heard about and it does go on. It goes on all around the world. To me it was a surprise that it was news, because we have been doing that and people do talk about it. I think it's an outrage. How would we react if somebody did it to us? We would be infuriated, willing to go to war. The fact that somebody came and tried to undermine our government.
MJ/AA
This is quite a beligerent rant, on par with your last beligerent rant. Where do I begin? How about the first sentence?
>>>You are not interested in my resume <<<
Nope. Your words are all that concerns me. Although, if you assisted in getting George W. Bush the nomination, or Rick Perry into the Governor’s mansion, or Kay Bailey Hutchingson or Phil Gramm into the senate, then I would advise you not to brag.
>>>I am certainly interested in any resume you may claim as to actual accomplishments of yours as a conservative and not just that you supported the Galveston sewer rat.<<<
First, I have seen no indication you are a traditional conservative. You might be one of those “New” conservatives, in line with Kay Bailey, G.W., Phil Gramm or, say, David Brooks, but you are no traditional conservative.
Second, it is either I support, as you call him, the “Galveston sewer rat” (how clever of you!), or support the Pretty Boy Slickster from Texas or the Pretty Boy Slickster from Mass., neither of whom will do a damn thing different from Obama or G.W. (well, maybe a tiny bit different, but not much).
>>>I doubt that I will see it because your resume of actual conservative accomplishments is likely to be what mathematicians call a null set, i.e. containing zero, zip, nada.<<<
No, I am not a know-it-all political hack, like you. I am a degreed engineer and a retired software designer. But you are welcome to read the nearly 5000 posts from me on Free Republic over the past 11 years to get a sense of where I come from, and how I got here. Read them all, then get back to me about my “credentials”.
[After a long, incoherent rant about how Ron Paul cannot be pro-life because the Planned Parenthood abortionist also delivered babies, or something—as I said, it was incoherent—you wrote:]
>>>What matters is what Paulie is willing to DO to stop abortion. The answer so far is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING as he hides behind his quaint barricade of the otherwise long ignored 10th amendment.<<<
I agree. He should just march right down to the White House, declare himself dictator, and ban abortion on the spot. [/s]
Man, you are nuts!
It sounds like you are not too thrilled by the 10th Amendment (I mean, after all, you are not a conservative), but it really does apply in the case of abortion, and in the cases of most everything else not specifically authorized to the general government.
>>>I have no need to “rethink my position.” My positions have remained those of the conservative movement (the New Right of the ‘60s and ‘70s) all these years.<<<
As I suspected, a “New” conservative. [I’m certain you have heard this one:] What’s the difference between a “New Conservative and a Liberal. The “New Conservative” drives the bus over the cliff slower than the Liberal.
>>>Other than attracting the support of such anti-Semites as David Duke and Conrad Black and such rank imbeciles as Alex Jones and the 9/11 Troofers<<<
Is that called, “slander by inference”? I’ll bet George W. Bush attracted some pretty shady supporters, as well. They don’t have a lot of choices, you know.
Regarding anti-semitism, I am Jewish, and I don’t think Ron Paul has an anti-semitic bone in his body.
I am also NOT a 9/11 truther. As an engineer, I believe I know how the towers fell. The jet fuel created a sufficiently high temp to weaken the steel cross beams—the beams which held the perimeter beams as a square. They eventually failed, resulting in an outward bulge in the perimeter beams and ultimate failure of that floor. The floors above pancaked onto that floor, resulting in total collapse. It is really pretty simple. It also helps that I saw many, many videos from private citizens of the planes hitting the towers (that eliminated the conspiracy angle).
The 2nd tower fell first because the plane hit much lower in the tower, with the wings at an angle. The extra weight above, and the multi-floor damage to the cross beams cause by the plane entry angle, resulted in quick failure. BTW, when the cross beams failed, it would have sounded like a bomb blast, at least that is what I have surmised from all the research.
But I digress...
>>>. . .fortunately Bibi Netanyahu can render Teheran and any Iranian nuclear weapon facility flat, black, and glowing in the dark.<<<
You think just like Ron Paul. He is on record many times saying that Israel has [hundreds] of nukes, and can defend itself, and they don’t need our help (well, maybe it would help if we stayed the hell out of their way. But he didn’t say that. I did).
>>>You guys should stop libeling George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as though somehow the circumstances of today’s United States and the USA of 1789 were somehow comparable.<<<
We never pretended circumstances today are similar to 1789. In those days they had limited, constitutional government. Today we have a tyranny. BTW, I recommend you look up the definition of the word “libel”.
>>>Neither had any problem accepting assistance from Admiral DeGrasse at Yorktown.<<<
War is hell. But we were not a nation at that time. We were revolutionary rebels, struggling against the largest army on earth. We took all the help we could get. I’m not sure what your point is.
>>>Thomas Jefferson bought the Louisiana Territory without any search for “constitutional authority” even though such expansions were quite foreseeable at the time.<<<
Actually, he submitted a proposal to congress for a constitutional amendment after the fact. He definitely knew he usurped the constitution, but he did not want the “deal of the century” to get away. Today these clowns don’t even consider the constitution, or long rang consequences, before usurpation. Consider G.W. and his Medicare Prescription Drug act, or, “No Child Left Behind”.
>>>If, like Woods and the surrendermonkey, you don’t like the Patriot Act, try the Federalist Alien and Sedition Acts even though the Federalists (Northeastern money obsessives like the Whigs and all too many Republicans after them) had the great advantage of being George Washington’s party. They also had the burden of being Alexander Hamilton’s party.<<<
Are you implying it is okay to have the Patriot Act, just because the Federalists under Adams had the Alien and Sedition Acts? No, thanks to either.
>>>If you think Ron Paul has become damaged goods, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Wait until you see his tattered political remains when this cycle is over. His fantasies never were, are not and never will be acceptable to actual conservatives.<<<
I believe you meant to say, “new-fangled conservatives”. You are definitely no conservative.
>>>Personally, I think all this talk of Ron Paul being a strict constructionist in the mold of the founding fathers is nothing but BS.<<<
But you have yet to prove it except with innuendo, false premises, and hair-splitting.
>>>csend: “Ron Paul is a strict constructionist”<<<
>>>Absolutely NobamaFor which country ?<<<
I’m still waiting for you and csense to prove he is not a strict constructionist.
>>>RP is not a true conservative - he’s a pure libertarian, which is quite different.<<<
You Ron Paul bashers need to get together on this one. Some say he is not a libertarian, and some (like you) say he is.
We went over this in the last thread, when the good doctor was spending federal funds on rehab clinics and “drop out reduction” programs.
There’s no need to go over that again.
>>>A Conservative would never call his country “imperialist”. William F. Buckley didn’t. Barry Goldwater would have committed hara-kiri before doing it, as would Ronald Reagan.<<<
I posted this earlier, but I’ll repeat it:
Native Hawaiians, Puerto Rico, Palmyra, the Northern Marianas, Guam, Cuba (Guantanamo) and the U.S. Virgin Islands (maybe others) might disagree with you about American Imperialism, but what do they know?
Maybe Ron Paul’s biggest “handicap” is he is just too damn honest.
Fine. He honestly hates America. He’s a traitor.
There is no way on God’s green and cooling Earth any Conservative should vote someone who calls America “imperialist”. That spits on the grave of any American who died for this country. If that isn’t heinous enough, it also sounds just like Chairman Obama and his puppet $oros.
Just like I don’t tolerate their intellectual treason, I reject Ron Paul’s.
I don’t see any of the folks you mentioned in revolt.
>>>We went over this in the last thread, when the good doctor was spending federal funds on rehab clinics and “drop out reduction” programs. There’s no need to go over that again.<<<
No, we do, because you misrepresented what he did.
You conveniently failed to mention that, because of the insane way money is budgeted, whereby the entire amount of the budget is first authorized, and then individual “pieces” of that budget are targeted for this and that, whatever is left over goes to the executive branch, and Obama can spend it any damn well he pleases—to buy votes, to punish enemies, to reward friends,. . . anything.
You also failed to mention that Ron Paul wants ultimately that there be no expenditures that are not constitutionally authorized, and he wants the entire budget “earmarked” to provide greater transparency so the taxpayers can see where their money is going.
As I mentioned several times in this thread, I think what Ron Paul did, that is, keeping as much money as he could out of the hands of Obama and his union and regulatory thugs, is an act of patriotism.
Admit it, you don’t want to debate. You only want to smear.
>>>He honestly hates America. He’s a traitor.<<<
Actually, I think he is fearful for his country. We are in way, way over our “collective” heads. [Note the word “collective”. We are a “collective” nation — no longer a nation of liberty.]
>>>There is no way on God’s green and cooling Earth any Conservative should vote someone who calls America “imperialist”.<<<
If you feel that way, vote for the smooth-talking RINO.
>>>That spits on the grave of any American who died for this country.<<<
Then why does he get more campaign donations from the military than darn near all other candidates combined? Maybe they know something you have not considered.
I served my country during the Vietnam era. I had many friends die in that God-forsaken place. I know how their hands were tied by politicians, and I know the treason of the media back home (especially Walter Cronkite). And I now see the politically correct rules of engagement in the middle east that makes it nearly impossible to get anything done.
Again, maybe our boys in the military know something you have not considered.
>>>Just like I don’t tolerate their intellectual treason, I reject Ron Paul’s.<<<
Speaking of treason, the enemies of our nation are also those who subvert the constitution. That includes RINO’s.
>>>I don’t see any of the folks you mentioned in revolt.<<<
At least you seem to agree that America might have been a wee bit Imperialistic.
>>>I don’t see any of the folks you mentioned in revolt.<<<
Forgot to mention: The native Hawaiians would revolt if they had the means—in a heartbeat!
I don’t smear, I state facts.
In 2009, Ron Paul out earmarked Nancy Pelosi while stating public funding of crap was a “tax rebate.”
Ron Paul has stated that 9/11 was America’s fault.
Ron Paul criticized America on IslamnoNazi Iran’s state run televison station.
Ron Paul has an endorsement of sorts from Code Pinko.
Some of Ron Paul’s supporters are Neo-Confederates. Some are neo-Nazis. Some are 9/11 Truthers.
None of this is Conservative thought, therefore it’s wrong. I will certainly do my best to make sure he doesn’t win the Republican nomination.
“Then why does he get more campaign donations from the military than darn near all other candidates combined Maybe they know something you have not considered.”
I disagree.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/10/the_fantasy_of_ron_pauls_milit.asp
“I suppose you were also against Kennedy negotiating with Khrushchev and Reagan negotiating with Gorbachev.”
Bogus comparison - a totally different psyche and mentality of Russians vs. fundamental Islamists. The idea of Mutually Assured Destruction was an effective deterrent with Russia - they didn’t want to die any more than we did.
NOT TRUE in Islam - Muhammad in the Koran declared that the only sure path to paradise is to kill, or be killed, in the name of Allah. Bin Laden stated fact when he said “we love death the way you in the West love life”. A large number of crazy Muslims, like Ahmedinejad, are Twelvers (the largest branch of Shiite Islam) - meaning they believe they can hasten the return of the Twelfth Imam, or Mahdi, by bathing the world in blood through widespread death and destruction, then establishing a global Caliphate.
Ahmedinejad begins every UN speech (and others) with a prayer to hasten the return of the Mahdi and he’s said many times he believes it’s his personal, sacred mission to bring that about. Radical Islamic leaders such as Ahmedinejad canNOT be reasoned with. Mutually Assured Destruction - ha! He and those like him welcome it.
Muhammad commands all the “faithful” to deal with Infidels (all non-Muslims) by 1) Inviting them to convert; 2) Asking them one more time; then 3) Subjugating (enslaving) or killing all who refuse to convert, with the dedicated mission of Islam reigning supreme over the earth.
What we do or don’t do makes no difference in their intent to kill us. They only respect might and strength, and they laugh at our weakness in retreating, our cripplin political correctness, and our attempts to negotiate with them, showing our lack of understanding in judging them by our own values. They loved BHO’s election (though they mock him) and they absolutely salivate over Ron Paul running.
RP doesn’t have a clue about the enemy we’re facing today. He doesn’t understand Islamic mentality, Sharia Law creeping into our communities, or the Stealth Jihad being waged on us right here at home as long as government looks the other way. Most dangerous of all, he doesn’t care to learn about it - obviously.
Lemme guess-— We should give Hawaii back to the native Hawaiians. While we’re at it, we’ll give back Alaska to Russia.
Really ?
>>>In 2009, Ron Paul out earmarked Nancy Pelosi while stating public funding of crap was a “tax rebate.”<<<
That is a smear. You took it completely out of context (as I explained to you and this thread many times). Where did you get your smear methods, from Chris Matthews?
That was mean of me. Maybe you are just too stupid understand the budget-earmarking process. If so, I apologize. (I admit, I did not understand it for a long time, because of the media, of course).
But you really should stop the smearing. It is unbecoming.
>>>Ron Paul has stated that 9/11 was America’s fault.<<<
You did not give any context, but no matter. The terrorists stated it was America’s fault. I guess Ron Paul believed them. This is, after all, a religious war, at least against us.
>>>Ron Paul criticized America on IslamnoNazi Iran’s state run televison station.<<<
I read it. It was pretty tame.
>>>Ron Paul has an endorsement of sorts from Code Pinko.<<<
And your point is? They are “anti-war” and Obama is not. Who’s left?
>>>Some of Ron Paul’s supporters are Neo-Confederates. Some are neo-Nazis. Some are 9/11 Truthers.<<<
As aforementioned, there are not a lot of choices. I’ll bet some of those also supported G.W. Bush, even Reagan.
>>>None of this is Conservative thought, therefore it’s wrong.<<<
I’ll admit it is not New-Conservative (Neo-Conservative) thought. But he never claimed that, to my knowledge. He is a traditional conservative, which you obviously do not understand.
>>>I will certainly do my best to make sure he doesn’t win the Republican nomination.<<<
We are still somewhat of a free country. Knock youself out. Give us another RINO.
>>>Lemme guess-— We should give Hawaii back to the native Hawaiians. While we’re at it, we’ll give back Alaska to Russia.<<<
Hell, no! I’m not frickin British. Those are our states and territories and we are going to keep them.
If I recall, the context of the post was, you made a flippant remark that none were in revolt. But you have proven over and oveer again that context is not your strength.
BTW, we purchased Alaska from the Russians. The acquisition of Hawaii was an actual act of Imperialism. That is why I did not mention Alaska in the initial post. But, of course, you knew that.
When I started my exchange with you earlier in this thread, I gave you the opportunity to make your case, along with hints at where the obstacles were. You took that opportunity and tossed it.
Since it hasn't sunk in yet, I'll spell it out for you. Foreign assistance works in exactly the same way that tribute does...as a function of national defense, as you correctly observed, and so long as it is operating in the interests of national security, it doesn't matter what you call the money, as you also correctly observed. You can call it "tribute," you can call it "extortion," you can even call it "protection," it doesn't matter because the the inherent moral implications aren't relevant from a legal point of view, and that is exactly where trip up your argument. You need to make a legal case rather than a moral.
I'm more than a little surprised that as an engineer, you don't seem to be able to transfer your logical skills to politics, then again, cognitive dissonance is anything but logical.
You guys scare me as much, if not more than Obama supporters. After all, you're right here amongst us.
Ron Paul is a RINO, just like Myth Rommney and Jon Huntsman (Who ?) I’d include Newt Gingrich in this, but why bother ? He’s a Pawlenty walking.
The truth is never a smear. Bottom line, Ron Paul out earmarked Nancy Pelosi. Not exactly a page out of the Ayn Rand playbook.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.